New York Judge Postpones Donald Trump’s Hush Money Sentencing

The Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office, responsible for bringing the charges, expressed readiness to proceed with sentencing on the newly scheduled date.

On Friday, a New York judge decided to postpone former U.S. President Donald Trump’s sentencing in his hush money case to November 26, after the upcoming election. This delay moves the original sentencing date from September 18 to a point after the November 5 presidential election, where Trump is the Republican nominee.

The judge, Justice Juan Merchan, emphasized his decision was made to preserve the court’s appearance of impartiality and to prevent any perceived political influences on the presidential election. “The imposition of sentence will be adjourned to avoid any appearance – however unwarranted – that the proceeding has been affected by or seeks to affect the approaching Presidential election in which the Defendant is a candidate,” Merchan stated. He reassured the public of the judiciary’s integrity, describing the court as “a fair, impartial and apolitical institution.”

Trump responded to the delay on his Truth Social platform, expressing his approval of the judge acknowledging the conditionality of the sentencing. “This case should be rightfully terminated, as we prepare for the Most Important Election in the History of our Country,” Trump wrote.

The case against Trump involves 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, connected to a $130,000 payment made by his then-lawyer to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to prevent her from discussing an alleged sexual encounter with Trump prior to the 2016 election. Trump has consistently denied the encounter and plans to appeal the conviction post-sentencing.

The Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office, responsible for bringing the charges, expressed readiness to proceed with sentencing on the newly scheduled date.

In related developments, Merchan plans to address a motion by Trump’s lawyers to overturn the conviction on November 12, following the Supreme Court’s decision regarding presidential immunity, which does not apply to personal conduct like that alleged in this case.